[TIP] unitteset outcomes (pass/fail/xfail/error), humans and automation

[Olemis Lang]

On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 4:10 PM, Olemis Lang <olemis at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 3:29 PM, Robert Collins
> <robertc at robertcollins.net> wrote:
>> On Tue, 2009-12-15 at 09:45 -0500, Olemis Lang wrote:
>>
>>
>>> > Well, on the standardising output front, have you looked at subunit ? :)
>>> > It aims at precisely that, with current included support for outputtin
>>> > it from pyunit, shunit, cppunit, 'check' (A C xUnit implementation),
>>> > converting to junit's xml format (which nearly all CI tools and many
>>> > IDE's understand) :)
>>>
>>> ... the serialization of the test results is another subject , but could be
>>> simpler if all TFs report test results following a well-known
>>> (model | pattern | standard | specification ...)
>>
>> CouldaWouldaShoulda :- testing frameworks don't all follow xUnit,
>
> I know
>

But anyway , it is often possible to wrap the execution of those TFs
using customized instances of TestCase thereby recording the results
provided by those frameworks using TestResult & Co.

PS: Does anybody knows about an exception to that «rule» ?

-- 
Regards,

Olemis.

Blog ES: http://simelo-es.blogspot.com/
Blog EN: http://simelo-en.blogspot.com/

Featured article:
Automated init.  -
http://bitbucket.org/osimons/trac-rpc-mq/changeset/e122336d1eb2/